Probably because in its time, there was nothing else like it and over the years like now especially, if you've just sorta barely seen a movie like that, you wouldn't think of it or value it as much as say someone would back then when there was nothing else comparable nor better graphically so to speak.

which IMO would fall under special effects, anytime people say star wars revolutionized film it's about what it looked like in its time.

as far as i'm concerned Indiana jones is a superior franchise in every way. though thats going too far off topic. i don't hate star wars, i just hate how it's treated so above other special effects based movies. i think special effects can be an art form in certain ways. it does take a lot of different artistic abilities

Yeah last stand you are big time wrong on this one, but everyone has their own opinions.

Yeah I gotcha Windu. I know it's as realistic as it could be. I actually got into a debate with someone who liked the third Indy because the other ones were "so fake". Just found that hilarious.

Raiders is easily the most realistic, as realistic as something about the ark of the covenant can be. though in some ways last crusade is my favorite. i like the ending sequence of him going through the trials.

on Star Wars i understand its not a popular opinion, but there just really is no depth to any of the characters outside of han solo and leia.